You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@predictionio.apache.org by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> on 2016/08/20 18:00:34 UTC
Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
What do people think remains for release?
1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t review until the donation and repos are set up.
2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that works after the release. Comments welcome.
3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up. Let’s ship-it.
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
Release?
1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this. Chan, can you make the repo public so we can review? If we get a donation in reasonable time, we will look at merging Chan’s changes. Chan have you signed the ICLA? https://www.apache.org/licenses/icla.txt
2) The one-line user install.sh https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 TLDR; suggests we release with the source build version of install.sh and point to this from the doc site. This will build from the master branch of the Guthub mirror. Please comment on the Jira.
3) we need to do due diligence on pio license requirements and update docs https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-27 this is unassigned, can someone look at this? It is a blocker for release.
Only PIO-27 is a blocker. We can wait a week to see if the template donation is done but even that doesn’t look like a blocker. All other Jiras look deferrable or resolvable now.
Thoughts?
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
BTW the Jira for license checking is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-27
On Sep 1, 2016, at 12:23 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
100% agree!
I’ll work on the text license verification tomorrow. Oops back to the Jira.
Ship it!
On Aug 30, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Donald Szeto <do...@apache.org> wrote:
I am aware that the paperwork is in the pipeline, but agree that the
release should not be blocked by that. I will take some time and look at
the license requirement of the binary distribution. If anyone is starting
the process of examining all third-party dependencies, please keep track of
progress clearly and often in JIRA so hopefully we can parallelize the work
if possible. I plan to start doing some of it later this week.
I also hope to start the release candidate process in the 1st week of
September. The community has been asking and we'd like to ship it to them.
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> It’s been over a week waiting for the template donation paperwork, which I
> imagine will take a few weeks to go through repo creation, license
> validation and PR merging before they can be released. Since they can be on
> a separate release schedules I’d like to remove them from being blocking
> release. We can point the Gallery at Chan’s github for now (just to remove
> the issue as a blocker). Any other opinions?
>
> #3 below is still the main blocker IMO. I have some time this week to
> handle the source license check but would have no clue about how to make
> SBT include the correct licenses in the binary artifacts. Donald is the
> only SBT expert I know in the project can anyone else help with the binary
> build bits mentioned in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26?
>
> There are several PRs that are in limbo since we aren’t adding new
> features or major new code. The only way to get moving on these is to
> release. Sooo...
>
> What do people think about a release? What sort of target date can we set?
> Can we get things ready by first week of September?
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> What do people think remains for release?
>
> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t
> review until the donation and repos are set up.
> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line
> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in
> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> works after the release. Comments welcome.
> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>
> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>
> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> Let’s ship-it.
>
>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
100% agree!
I’ll work on the text license verification tomorrow. Oops back to the Jira.
Ship it!
On Aug 30, 2016, at 1:47 PM, Donald Szeto <do...@apache.org> wrote:
I am aware that the paperwork is in the pipeline, but agree that the
release should not be blocked by that. I will take some time and look at
the license requirement of the binary distribution. If anyone is starting
the process of examining all third-party dependencies, please keep track of
progress clearly and often in JIRA so hopefully we can parallelize the work
if possible. I plan to start doing some of it later this week.
I also hope to start the release candidate process in the 1st week of
September. The community has been asking and we'd like to ship it to them.
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> It’s been over a week waiting for the template donation paperwork, which I
> imagine will take a few weeks to go through repo creation, license
> validation and PR merging before they can be released. Since they can be on
> a separate release schedules I’d like to remove them from being blocking
> release. We can point the Gallery at Chan’s github for now (just to remove
> the issue as a blocker). Any other opinions?
>
> #3 below is still the main blocker IMO. I have some time this week to
> handle the source license check but would have no clue about how to make
> SBT include the correct licenses in the binary artifacts. Donald is the
> only SBT expert I know in the project can anyone else help with the binary
> build bits mentioned in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26?
>
> There are several PRs that are in limbo since we aren’t adding new
> features or major new code. The only way to get moving on these is to
> release. Sooo...
>
> What do people think about a release? What sort of target date can we set?
> Can we get things ready by first week of September?
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> What do people think remains for release?
>
> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t
> review until the donation and repos are set up.
> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line
> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in
> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> works after the release. Comments welcome.
> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>
> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>
> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> Let’s ship-it.
>
>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Donald Szeto <do...@apache.org>.
I am aware that the paperwork is in the pipeline, but agree that the
release should not be blocked by that. I will take some time and look at
the license requirement of the binary distribution. If anyone is starting
the process of examining all third-party dependencies, please keep track of
progress clearly and often in JIRA so hopefully we can parallelize the work
if possible. I plan to start doing some of it later this week.
I also hope to start the release candidate process in the 1st week of
September. The community has been asking and we'd like to ship it to them.
On Tue, Aug 30, 2016 at 10:05 AM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> It’s been over a week waiting for the template donation paperwork, which I
> imagine will take a few weeks to go through repo creation, license
> validation and PR merging before they can be released. Since they can be on
> a separate release schedules I’d like to remove them from being blocking
> release. We can point the Gallery at Chan’s github for now (just to remove
> the issue as a blocker). Any other opinions?
>
> #3 below is still the main blocker IMO. I have some time this week to
> handle the source license check but would have no clue about how to make
> SBT include the correct licenses in the binary artifacts. Donald is the
> only SBT expert I know in the project can anyone else help with the binary
> build bits mentioned in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26?
>
> There are several PRs that are in limbo since we aren’t adding new
> features or major new code. The only way to get moving on these is to
> release. Sooo...
>
> What do people think about a release? What sort of target date can we set?
> Can we get things ready by first week of September?
>
> ----------------------------------
>
> What do people think remains for release?
>
> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t
> review until the donation and repos are set up.
> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line
> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in
> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> works after the release. Comments welcome.
> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>
> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>
> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> Let’s ship-it.
>
>
Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
It’s been over a week waiting for the template donation paperwork, which I imagine will take a few weeks to go through repo creation, license validation and PR merging before they can be released. Since they can be on a separate release schedules I’d like to remove them from being blocking release. We can point the Gallery at Chan’s github for now (just to remove the issue as a blocker). Any other opinions?
#3 below is still the main blocker IMO. I have some time this week to handle the source license check but would have no clue about how to make SBT include the correct licenses in the binary artifacts. Donald is the only SBT expert I know in the project can anyone else help with the binary build bits mentioned in https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26?
There are several PRs that are in limbo since we aren’t adding new features or major new code. The only way to get moving on these is to release. Sooo...
What do people think about a release? What sort of target date can we set? Can we get things ready by first week of September?
----------------------------------
What do people think remains for release?
1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t review until the donation and repos are set up.
2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that works after the release. Comments welcome.
3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up. Let’s ship-it.
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
Collectively this podling must accomplish these tasks in order to make a release. This is what you signed up for with incubation.
> On Aug 21, 2016, at 12:59 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>
> I don’t have the time to do this. Jira PIO-27 covers this conversation and is set to blocking.
>
> Can anyone help?
>
>
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 12:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> It took Gearpump six release candidates before their first release from incubation passed the IPMC's checks on correct LICENSE and NOTICE files (note: different requirements for source and binary artifacts) and that all the licenses of all transitive dependencies were accounted for and did not require anything in Category X. This cannot be fully automated even with maven projects where license data is part of the POM model, because the metadata is sometimes wrong. I don't know how it works for SBT but suspect at best it's the same situation.
>
> The process is basically:
>
> - Study and understand fully the foundation and Incubator release policies with respect to licensing requirements.
>
> - Dump the transitive dependencies of your source build and ensure there are only Category A dependencies, or you have a plan to replace something in B with A. X is not allowed except in limited circumstances as part of the build only.
> - Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the source root directory contain everything required by policy.
>
> - Dump the transitive dependencies of your binary builds and make sure everything is licensed under licenses in Categories A or B.
> - Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files included in **every PIO jar** contain everything required by policy. If you aren't including such files in every jar fix the build so it happens as required.
>
> You can avoid dealing with binary artifact requirements by producing only source artifacts for releases.
>
>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> This is a laborious manual thing. Most incubator projects get dinged on
>> those very issues.
>>
>> We have been trying to get a first Pirk release for a week now, but holding
>> off to fix the license and notices.
>>
>> Maybe in PIO, its already been taken care of. Donald?
>>
>> Regardless it would be good if someone reviewed the release artifacts now
>> and validates the License and Notices as opposed to pushing a release and
>> getting -1 vote from IPMC.
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT.
>>> Could you add a Jira with comments?
>>>
>>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
>>> License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
>>> accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
>>> appropriate project release artifacts.
>>>
>>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What do people think remains for release?
>>>>
>>>> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we
>>> can’t
>>>> review until the donation and repos are set up.
>>>> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the
>>> one-line
>>>> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug
>>> here
>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
>>>> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots
>>> in
>>>> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
>>>> works after the release. Comments welcome.
>>>> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
>>>> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>>>>
>>>> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
>>>> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
>>>> Let’s ship-it.
>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
I don’t have the time to do this. Jira PIO-27 covers this conversation and is set to blocking.
Can anyone help?
On Aug 20, 2016, at 12:14 PM, Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
It took Gearpump six release candidates before their first release from incubation passed the IPMC's checks on correct LICENSE and NOTICE files (note: different requirements for source and binary artifacts) and that all the licenses of all transitive dependencies were accounted for and did not require anything in Category X. This cannot be fully automated even with maven projects where license data is part of the POM model, because the metadata is sometimes wrong. I don't know how it works for SBT but suspect at best it's the same situation.
The process is basically:
- Study and understand fully the foundation and Incubator release policies with respect to licensing requirements.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your source build and ensure there are only Category A dependencies, or you have a plan to replace something in B with A. X is not allowed except in limited circumstances as part of the build only.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the source root directory contain everything required by policy.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your binary builds and make sure everything is licensed under licenses in Categories A or B.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files included in **every PIO jar** contain everything required by policy. If you aren't including such files in every jar fix the build so it happens as required.
You can avoid dealing with binary artifact requirements by producing only source artifacts for releases.
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is a laborious manual thing. Most incubator projects get dinged on
> those very issues.
>
> We have been trying to get a first Pirk release for a week now, but holding
> off to fix the license and notices.
>
> Maybe in PIO, its already been taken care of. Donald?
>
> Regardless it would be good if someone reviewed the release artifacts now
> and validates the License and Notices as opposed to pushing a release and
> getting -1 vote from IPMC.
>
>
>
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT.
>> Could you add a Jira with comments?
>>
>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
>> License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
>> accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
>> appropriate project release artifacts.
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> What do people think remains for release?
>>>
>>> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we
>> can’t
>>> review until the donation and repos are set up.
>>> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the
>> one-line
>>> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug
>> here
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
>>> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots
>> in
>>> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
>>> works after the release. Comments welcome.
>>> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
>>> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>>>
>>> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
>>> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>>>
>>> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
>>> Let’s ship-it.
>>
>>
Fwd: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
FYI..
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 3:14 PM
Subject: Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
To: dev@predictionio.incubator.apache.org
It took Gearpump six release candidates before their first release from
incubation passed the IPMC's checks on correct LICENSE and NOTICE files
(note: different requirements for source and binary artifacts) and that all
the licenses of all transitive dependencies were accounted for and did not
require anything in Category X. This cannot be fully automated even with
maven projects where license data is part of the POM model, because the
metadata is sometimes wrong. I don't know how it works for SBT but suspect
at best it's the same situation.
The process is basically:
- Study and understand fully the foundation and Incubator release policies
with respect to licensing requirements.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your source build and ensure there
are only Category A dependencies, or you have a plan to replace something
in B with A. X is not allowed except in limited circumstances as part of
the build only.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the source root directory contain
everything required by policy.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your binary builds and make sure
everything is licensed under licenses in Categories A or B.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files included in **every PIO jar** contain
everything required by policy. If you aren't including such files in every
jar fix the build so it happens as required.
You can avoid dealing with binary artifact requirements by producing only
source artifacts for releases.
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>
> This is a laborious manual thing. Most incubator projects get dinged on
> those very issues.
>
> We have been trying to get a first Pirk release for a week now, but
holding
> off to fix the license and notices.
>
> Maybe in PIO, its already been taken care of. Donald?
>
> Regardless it would be good if someone reviewed the release artifacts now
> and validates the License and Notices as opposed to pushing a release and
> getting -1 vote from IPMC.
>
>
>
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>
wrote:
>>
>> Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT.
>> Could you add a Jira with comments?
>>
>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on
the
>> License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
>> accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
>> appropriate project release artifacts.
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>
wrote:
>>>
>>> What do people think remains for release?
>>>
>>> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we
>> can’t
>>> review until the donation and repos are set up.
>>> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the
>> one-line
>>> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug
>> here
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
>>> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots
>> in
>>> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
>>> works after the release. Comments welcome.
>>> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
>>> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>>>
>>> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
>>> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>>>
>>> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
>>> Let’s ship-it.
>>
>>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
It took Gearpump six release candidates before their first release from incubation passed the IPMC's checks on correct LICENSE and NOTICE files (note: different requirements for source and binary artifacts) and that all the licenses of all transitive dependencies were accounted for and did not require anything in Category X. This cannot be fully automated even with maven projects where license data is part of the POM model, because the metadata is sometimes wrong. I don't know how it works for SBT but suspect at best it's the same situation.
The process is basically:
- Study and understand fully the foundation and Incubator release policies with respect to licensing requirements.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your source build and ensure there are only Category A dependencies, or you have a plan to replace something in B with A. X is not allowed except in limited circumstances as part of the build only.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files in the source root directory contain everything required by policy.
- Dump the transitive dependencies of your binary builds and make sure everything is licensed under licenses in Categories A or B.
- Ensure the LICENSE and NOTICE files included in **every PIO jar** contain everything required by policy. If you aren't including such files in every jar fix the build so it happens as required.
You can avoid dealing with binary artifact requirements by producing only source artifacts for releases.
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:24 AM, Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> This is a laborious manual thing. Most incubator projects get dinged on
> those very issues.
>
> We have been trying to get a first Pirk release for a week now, but holding
> off to fix the license and notices.
>
> Maybe in PIO, its already been taken care of. Donald?
>
> Regardless it would be good if someone reviewed the release artifacts now
> and validates the License and Notices as opposed to pushing a release and
> getting -1 vote from IPMC.
>
>
>
>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>
>> Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT.
>> Could you add a Jira with comments?
>>
>> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
>> License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
>> accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
>> appropriate project release artifacts.
>>
>>> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> What do people think remains for release?
>>>
>>> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we
>> can’t
>>> review until the donation and repos are set up.
>>> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the
>> one-line
>>> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug
>> here
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
>>> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots
>> in
>>> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
>>> works after the release. Comments welcome.
>>> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
>>> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>>>
>>> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
>>> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>>>
>>> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
>>> Let’s ship-it.
>>
>>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <su...@gmail.com>.
This is a laborious manual thing. Most incubator projects get dinged on
those very issues.
We have been trying to get a first Pirk release for a week now, but holding
off to fix the license and notices.
Maybe in PIO, its already been taken care of. Donald?
Regardless it would be good if someone reviewed the release artifacts now
and validates the License and Notices as opposed to pushing a release and
getting -1 vote from IPMC.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:21 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT.
> Could you add a Jira with comments?
>
> On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
> License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
> accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
> appropriate project release artifacts.
>
> On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
>
> > What do people think remains for release?
> >
> > 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we
> can’t
> > review until the donation and repos are set up.
> > 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the
> one-line
> > install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug
> here
> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> > install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots
> in
> > the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> > works after the release. Comments welcome.
> > 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> > qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
> >
> > Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> > non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
> >
> > Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> > Let’s ship-it.
>
>
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com>.
Sound good. Is this a hand thing or can we automate it like PIO-26 RAT. Could you add a Jira with comments?
On Aug 20, 2016, at 11:16 AM, Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org> wrote:
While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
appropriate project release artifacts.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> What do people think remains for release?
>
> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t
> review until the donation and repos are set up.
> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line
> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in
> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> works after the release. Comments welcome.
> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>
> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>
> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> Let’s ship-it.
Re: Apache PIO v0.10.0 release
Posted by Suneel Marthi <sm...@apache.org>.
While waiting on #1 below, I would ask that you do the due diligence on the
License and Notice files and ensure that all third party jars have been
accounted for and the License and Notice files are included in the
appropriate project release artifacts.
On Sat, Aug 20, 2016 at 2:00 PM, Pat Ferrel <pa...@occamsmachete.com> wrote:
> What do people think remains for release?
>
> 1) template donation and mods. Chan Lee has done work on this but we can’t
> review until the donation and repos are set up.
> 2) install.sh. There are some suggestions on how to deal with the one-line
> install here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-22 and a bug here
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-25 PIO-22 suggests we have an
> install based on source pull and build so it will work even on snapshots in
> the “develop” branch but we could also have an install from binary that
> works after the release. Comments welcome.
> 3) https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PIO-26 has a PR but I don’t fee
> qualified to merge it, can someone pick this up?
>
> Anything else? I took the liberty of marking anything I thought was a
> non-blocker but unresolved as minor. Feel free to disagree.
>
> Hopefully when #1 comes through we will have everything else cleared up.
> Let’s ship-it.